johnklem Reviews

Culprits (2023– )

A very solid 8 - which means seriously better than almost all of this genre

[8/10 · 21 December 2023]

The naysayer who criticised the IMDb description of a comedy? You're quite right. A comedy, this ain't. But, and this is an important point, children, IMDb's idiocy isn't the show's fault. OK, this is a wonderful example of the heist/caper genre with all the usual twists and turns, characters and plot points - but done better than you've seen before. Characters are perfectly written and plot points are predictable but only after the event - I could have/should have seen that coming - but I didn't. This is an always engrossing and sometimes thrilling take on the genre which has been seriously underrated so far. I think I know why.

Better (2023)

Execution is everything

[9/10 · 18 February 2023]

The idea's clever and in less capable hands might have given birth to a good but forgettable TV show. However... in the hands of these writers and the two leads, this is an extraordinary piece of work of emotional maturity and depth that transcends genre. There isn't a wrong step anywhere (including the ending!!). Everything that happens is true to the emotional state of the characters and the trolls who shout about credibility need to expand their horizons beyond gaming and ask their parents to explain. Leila Farzad always delivers but this role allows her unusual freedom and she repays the favour in spades. For me, the outstanding performance though, is Andrew Buchan. He's an actor who's appeared in dozens of TV dramas and who always hints at a darker side but, to my limited knowledge, has never had this kind of chance to show what he can really do. This performance should open a lot more doors for his career. This really is a very special TV show. Is it for everyone? No, absolutely not and when I was much younger, I might have sided with the trolls. Glad I grew up!

Close to Me (2021)

Low-key dramatic stunner

[8/10 · 5 October 2022]

If you write, film and broadcast a truly adult drama, plaudits are going to be thin on the ground. This is such a drama - a haunting and troubling dissection of a marriage. The star, in every sense, is Connie Nielsen who once freed from the constraints of Hollywood has grown into an extraordinary actress. This is uncomfortable viewing but stay to the end and you'll be rewarded. This story will resonate for a long, long time - not because of what happens but because of why and how it happens. No easy answers or even real certainty. Instead, it looks slightly different every time you look at it. Just like real life.

Gaslit (2022)

Absolute stunner that must be watched 'til the final episode

[9/10 · 25 September 2022]

Happily, not a lot of bots reviews of this show (note to Amazon: you need to fix the bots issue on IMDb reviews) but too many reviewers posted after the first couple of episodes and missed the point - in spades! This show is extraordinary. It begins in low-key fashion and feels like a gentle satire. The sheer incompetence of most of the Watergate protagonists makes for a ready comedic target. BUT, then things start to get real - not instantly but gradually. Gradually the tone changes and jolly japes become matters of life and death. This is seriously grown-up entertainment. Both Penn and Roberts are extraordinary in their roles and deserve extraordinary plaudits. This will resonate long, long after the final episode.

Fargo (2014–2024)

A Review of Season 4

[8/10 · 8 March 2021]

Of seasons one through three, two were brilliant and one (I forget which) was simply very, very good. And now comes season four and it's different. The canvas is larger, the setup more drawn out and it could so easily have been what others here have accused it of - but it isn't. I doubt those most vociferous critics of this latest season watched beyond the first episode, which is a shame because they denied themselves an extraordinary pleasure. Deeper and more complex than earlier seasons, number four is a multi-layered, sprawling epic which retains the trademark sly, black humor but adds real depth. And against all the odds given the racial subplots, there's a remarkable lack of preaching. Not much American TV or film has managed that recently. Without revisiting the first three seasons, I can't be sure but this one feels like the best.

Apple Tree Yard (2017)

If art is defined by its ability to change, however slightly, the way we see the world

[9/10 · 12 February 2021]

...then this is art, and perhaps great art. This is an extraordinary piece of work. On a superficial level, the casting and acting are pitch perfect and the snapshots of a marriage and an affair are compelling. But the greater strength here lies in the story's ability to convey the unavoidable ambiguities of real life. America has flooded the world with the cultural equivalents of Disney and Coca Cola and we all expect simple questions and simpler answers. Apple Tree Yard gives the lie to that. Watch it from beginning to end and be changed.

Primary Colors (1998)

Always good, twenty years on it's great

[8/10 · 29 December 2020]

When Primary Colors came out in 1998, it suffered from proximity to the book, which was simply brilliant, and because the central characters were inescapably based on a sitting President and his First Lady. Even twenty odd years ago, American politics was polarized to such a degree that half the country saw film and book as an assault on their heroes. Two decades later, the film has become a masterpiece. Distance and time have reframed this film and it's nothing less than the best political movie of our epoch. Four years of Trump have so dulled our senses that moral dilemmas that seemed remote or arcane in 1998 now seem poignant and terribly relevant. The writing and direction of Elaine May and Mike Nichols glow respectively and the cast is almost as good. Maura Tierney, John Travolta, Emma Thompson and Kathy Bates are perfect, as are the numerous supporting actors. I have reservations about Larry Hagman and most importantly, Adrian Lester. These are casting rather than an acting issues. Lester for me never quite convinces. He's just too English and perhaps this is only an issue for English viewers and I absolutely understand why he got the role. He's almost perfect but that one imperfection is for me the single biggest flaw in what for me is a now near perfect film.

Greyhound (2020)

Somewhere, there's an old people's home that's missing a few inmates...

[5/10 · 12 July 2020]

Year before last's CGI meets an aged, overweight cast wrapped in a clumsily shortened script in an unrealised story of WW2 naval courage. Almost any British movie from the 40s or 50s does a better job of conveying the nuts and bolts of defending the North Atlantic convoys from German U boats. A 64 year old destroyer captain? Really?

The Old Guard (2020)

TV Movie

[4/10 · 11 July 2020]

Rubbish generic acting, ticks all the PC boxes at the expense of credibility, rubbish generic script, the miracle of modern cgi, Charlize Theron having a bad hair day. It's not the filmmakers (and the star) who should be ashamed of themselves. They were focused on the money and why not. No, it's the audience that should be ashamed. Seriously people? This is barely watchable nonsense. Not worth your time and certainly not worth your money.

The Great (2020–2023)

Hilarious and brilliant take on the age of enlightenment and Catherine's rise to power

[9/10 · 29 June 2020]

Wonderful script and perhaps even better casting has produced this gem. Artistic license with historical accuracy runs amok and the result is one of the most attractive, entertaining and clever shows ever. This might be Elle Fanning's most perfect role but the whole cast is superb - just watch her ladies' maid. Like all the best satires, this riffs on the essence of the moment , providing an intellectually satisfying backdrop to even the funniest moments. Addendum: I wrote the above before i'd watched the final episode. That last episode is the brightest gem of all. Things get serious and you realise that you care. I mean, you really care about the characters. The comedy's quietly distracted you from just how well-drawn, how fully realised they are. And then you see it! The final episode is as dramatic and involving as anything that cinema has produced because you've fallen for every last one of them. Utterly brilliant. Post Scriptum: If you doubt what I've written, try watching the UK attempt at a straight history "Catherine the Great". I did - tried, that is. Historically, more accurate? Certainly. But the lack of life reminded me of a stuffed animal, compared (as I had to) with The Great. Try it for yourselves.

Traitors (2019)

Good points make it worth watching

[6/10 · 16 April 2020]

Traitors is an interesting idea that suffers from extraneous subplots and some cringeworthy exposition. You'll be lectured on race relations in the USA, on abortion rights, on women in the workplace, on systemic abuse of Jews and a dozen other worthy but in this context distracting issues. That's just bad writing. At its core though, Traitors is a tale about one woman's emotional journey into, depending on your POV, adulthood or corruption and that story is very well told and very well acted by Emma Appleton. A second season? Why not.

The Favourite (2018)

Wickedly entertaining and accurate depiction of an unwelcome menage a trois

[8/10 · 15 February 2019]

Firstly, this is not for simple palates. It lacks obvious dramatic moments and the kind of crowd-pleasing finale that the cousins seem to need. In their place, the film offers endless nuance, psychological and emotional truth and an ending that perfectly fits the story as told. And it packages all of that in a deceptively simple movie. And deception is the word here. This is like Liaisons Dangereuses for real people. The cast, Rachel Weisz, Emma Stone and Olivia Colman all bring their considerable A game to a very smart and very witty script. The cinematography is spot-on and the music is idiosyncratic and sheer perfection. Of course, all these attributes inevitably limit the film's audience. I imagine that showings outside the big coastal cities of the US will be less than enthusiastically welcomed but that's a very small and unavoidable price to pay. If you got past third grade and have an IQ in triple digits, buy a ticket now. A footnote for those who gave the movie a poor or worse rating: because you lack the education, breadth of vision or humanity to understand what's really a very simple story, don't blame the film, the actors or the filmmaker. Look to yourself. Recognize this opportunity to become a fuller, more complete human being. Learn to read.

Widows (2018)

When will Hollywood learn...

[5/10 · 25 January 2019]

...that making something politically correct and casting it with "inclusion" as the single guiding principle does not a masterpiece make. Or, in the case of the 2018 remake of Widows, does not even a decent movie make. As William Goldman famously said "Nobody knows anything" and this is exhibit A in that argument. I haven't been beaten over the head with this many infantile messages since I watched Crash. And, to add insult to injury, the writing is clunky and dull and the acting is proof that even the best thespians can't overcome a poor script. There are worse flicks out there but they, at least, own their badness. This one wants you to award it with Oscars. A sad reflection on the world of 2019.

Life on Mars (2008–2009)

Awful remake for the children that watch network TV shows

[3/10 · 2 January 2019]

Simply dreadful. This is the quintessence of everything that's wrong with American network television. It's a frame for frame remake of an extraordinary British TV show that manages to miss the entire point. It's clumsy, inept, politically "correct" and, all in all, awful. The acting is mixed, to put it kindly. But the direction and the writing are everything that we've come to expect from the big four networks. I know that there are people, mainly in the flyover states, who've missed out on the last fifty odd years but they are, thank God, a dying breed. Network TV needs to wake up. There's a reason that people watch cable shows. Life on Mars might have been even better than the UK version. Shameless managed it. The US version was even better than the UK version but as long as the big four networks believe that we're living in the 1950s they will continue to lose ratings.

Deadlier Than the Male (1967)

Nice 60s time capsule

[7/10 · 9 September 2018]

I'd forgotten this film. At the time, it felt like Bond light but revisiting it half a century later, it's a minor gem. Judged as a movie, it's barely a six but with the perspective of distance it's better. No obvious sets, as far as I could tell all the interiors matched the exteriors. Drummond's apartment in Albert Hall Mansions is really there. I knew the area and those apartments intimately in the 60s. Sure, it lacks the high camp appeal of the Modesty Blaise flick but this really is the way it was. The two girls have a much more complex role than in any Bond movie and their relationship is hilarious. We're in Killing Eve territory. Yes, the usual britflick issues surface in the fight scenes, particularly judged by current standards, but take it for what it is today and it's thoroughly entertaining. There was a second Bulldog Drummond film which I haven't seen but it lacks Nigel Green's wonderful villain and by all accounts is inferior. If you're tempted to read the books, know that they're very different. I like them but their mix of sadism, snobbery and xenophobia will offend delicate minds that need a safe space.

The Brink (2015)

Shame on HBO for bowing to government pressure

[9/10 · 17 August 2018]

Clever, very, very funny, insightful, instructive and addictively entertaining. So, why did HBO not renew for a second season? Hmm. I wonder.

Halt and Catch Fire (2014–2017)

Even the people that praise it are missing the point...

[9/10 · 25 February 2018]

I am in awe of the writing and the acting. This show epitomises the idea of character-driven. The emotional truth of the script and the actors is on a different plane to anything you might have seen. Comparisons with Mad Men and other shows are irrelevant. There is no comparison. These people are as real as fictional characters can get. The show is a deeply spiritual experience. Transcendental. Thank you.

Intelligence (2005–2007)

Only two seasons? You have to be kidding me! WTF!

[8/10 · 24 August 2017]

Imagine Miami Vice put in a blender with Casino and The Conversation, spiced up with a few splashes of your favorite political conspiracy thriller, passed through a sieve that removes all the flash and you have Intelligence. Set in Vancouver, this is a highly engaging series that's littered with Emmy-worthy performances from a (Canadian) cast you've probably never heard of.

Silver Bears (1977)

But factor in the nostalgia and it's a 7.5

[6/10 · 26 May 2017]

Here's the prob. The book's a lot better. Paul Erdman invented the financial thriller with Billion Dollar Sure Thing and followed it up with this story. Inevitably, it's a 70s caper pic without the physical action. Not a great recipe but it works. The leads are OK. Michael Caine isn't given a lot to work with and Jay Leno shows he was right to take another direction. The supporting roles are much better filled. Joss Ackland and Charles Gray both deliver on cue and whoever plays Donald Luckman comes closer than anyone to the book. On the other hand, Cybil Shepherd's Debbie Luckman is nothing like the book. She's better! In the book, Debbie's a frustrated, embittered bitch. And not without reason but here, she's a suburban child escaping her boundaries but never breaking faith with Donald. Donald's going to be locked up and she's not about to abandon him. But Michael Caine's home is awfully close to the jail ...

Prime Suspect: Tennison (2017)

Convincing psychological portrait

[8/10 · 23 May 2017]

Let's set our guidelines. I'm reviewing a prequel to Prime Suspect. One that's set in 1973. What does it need to achieve? A damning indictment of sex discrimination and police culture of the period? No, that's been done. It's a stage setter, a picture of how the seeds were sown. Of how a twenty-something girl from a nice, middle-class background became the towering presence that was Helen Mirren. Job done. In ways I didn't see coming.

As a police procedural, it's above average but no more. The portrayal of 1973 is pretty damn' good (I was there) but the lame music video intros show a serious lack of confidence. Relax people, we get it and we don't need Slade to reinforce it.

There are some writing hiccups, as anyone watching the final episode of season one can attest. It may be inconvenient to have to explain how our heroine reaches the roof without tripping over her unconscious colleague or being shot by the armed and desperate bank robber but as writers you need to deal with it. Having our heroine magically appear on the roof isn't good enough. It's lazy and assumes that the audience doesn't care.

The actress who plays the "Jane"character has a difficult role. Although she's cast as the lead, her role is really a supporting one (shades of 70s sexism??) and all the more difficult for that. The angle is a necessary one to set us up for the second season and it takes an actress of strength to deliver. Stephanie Martini (a seriously Ian Fleming name!) delivers a low key, contained performance of great nuance. Much as Helen Mirren might have done.

I, for one, can't wait to see the next chapter of this story. It deserves a second season and perhaps some new recruits to the writing team.

White Collar (2009–2014)

If "It Takes a Thief" met "Mcmillan and Wife"...

[7/10 · 5 April 2017]

... on a properly chaperoned date, this might be the eventual outcome. White Collar is a network show so there's nothing to frighten the horses (or the god-fearing denizens of the flyover states) but it has a good heart, well-cast leads and explores enough moral and personal conundrums to keep undemanding but intelligent viewers watching. I like the characters. Against all the odds, I'm already watching the fourth season.

For all it's simplistic world view, the main characters engage you. Real life? Absolutely not. But the show presents moral dilemmas that flesh out the facile story lines and allow the main characters to gain some depth. It's still mind candy but that's OK.

If I have one issue with the show, it's the contempt that it has for its audience. Most of the time, it doesn't show but occasionally the script reveals that disdain. Do you know the difference between China and Japan? Is the Spanish language indistinguishable from Portuguese? According to the writers or perhaps the producers of White Collar the correct answers are No and Yes respectively!

Seriously? The show and you deserve better. These are not mistakes, they are cynical shortcuts, assumptions that the audience will not be able to tell the difference. Even Sam Goldwyn's legendary freedom with historical facts pails before this onslaught of convenient nonsense.

Is this a problem? It should be. Does it spoil the show? Don't let it. Watch the show anyway.

Addendum I've now watched the entire show. It remains consistently good right up to the final episode which is a cracker. Yes, the occasional disregard for the audience is still there, witness the birthdate of Neil's father's partner (1934? Really?) but the show's strengths outweigh all of that. And that final episode? Wow!

StartUp (2016–2018)

Gets better by the minute

[8/10 · 18 March 2017]

It must be really hard being what passes for a professional critic in this post-deregulation era. No training, no guidelines, no taste, limited intellect and a $200 TV from BestBuy. Man, life sucks. Even if you wanted to take the time to actually watch the shows and movies that you're reviewing, you can't. You're forced to fast-forward and hope that no one notices that you're reviewing a show or a movie that you haven't actually watched. So, you play safe. You follow the crowd. You read other reviews and mentally thank the reviewers for saving you the time. Not that you had a choice, your ADD saw to that. Bottom line? Ignore the professional reviewers. They haven't watched it. StartUp is not the greatest show ever but it is better than ninety percent of the shows out there at the moment and has absolutely earned its second season. I was blown away by the first season finale. As well constructed an ending/setup as I've seen... ever!

Addendum. I've finished the second season and added one star to make it an eight. The characters continue to develop and the storyline stays true to its origins - as do the characters. We have some new players and they are 100% congruent, adding some more texture and some more locations to the story. This is a terrific show. No reservations. It's to the credit of the writers that I want a third season but have no idea where that might take us.

Nina Forever (2015)

What an interesting film - flawed but oh so interesting...

[6/10 · 13 February 2016]

A fabulous concept, lots of problems but well worth an hour and a half of your life. For a first film, this is awesome. Its flaws are all of inexperience - an over-egged script and some logical but emotionally unconvincing physicalisations of the dead girlfriend. Its strengths are of original talent, a cast that's much better than the budget would suggest and an utterly unique point of view. One of the strengths of the movie is the actress who plays the living girlfriend. She could be Ruth Wilson's sibling and brings a similar level of interest to the most ordinary moments. The rest of the film is adequate for the purpose - which is exactly what it needs to be. Cinematography and locations are unobtrusive and allow the concept room to breathe. I hope the filmmakers draw the right conclusions and move onwards and upwards. Hey guys, if you're ever in Los Angeles. look me up!

The Counselor (2013)

8 for ambition and 4 for results = 6

[6/10 · 7 February 2015]

The Counselor could have been one of my all-time favorite flicks. I've watched it twice and I'll see it again before I die. I'd rather watch a single ambitious failure than a dozen safe successes and this is a hugely ambitious failure. What draws me back time and again is the challenge of understanding why it doesn't work. The cast is stellar and the script crackles with taut, witty dialog and some thought-provoking philosophy. There are even some very funny jokes. Why wasn't Jesus born in Mexico? You'll have to watch the movie for the answer. The photography is gorgeous, the south west locations unusual and that wonderful French confection, the mise en scene, on the face of it perfect. After two viewings, I'm beginning to understand the problem. There's an odd lack of energy. That's always a danger with an ensemble piece or a story that's centered on an everyman and Ridley Scott's been down that road once before. Kingdom of Heaven had the same issues and it's instructive that the director's cut was ultimately the much better version. So, here we have another ensemble piece built around an everyman. Instead of Orlando Bloom, we have Michael Fassbender but here Fassbender, whose acting credentials are pretty damn good, is oddly uninvolving. Of course, his performance is authentic, restrained and everything you'd expect from an actor of his calibre. But he's shallow. Right there, we get to the heart of the problem. He is shallow. He is an everyman, caught up in a nightmare created by his own weakness. But we never learn the root of that weakness, why he needs the deal so badly and that's what's missing from The Counselor. It's like watching an accident that happened years ago to people you never knew. The rest of the cast? Everyone delivers. Badem hams it up shamelessly, Cruz is as good as always, Ganz has the best cameo, Pitt proves yet again that he's a far better supporting actor than starring and Perez is perfect. The oddity here is Cameron Diaz. She's not miscast as other reviewers have argued. She's actually spot on. The beautiful, smart survivor who's reaching her sell-by date as a rich man's toy and knows it. That it isn't a wholely successful performance is not, I think, her fault. She has perhaps the meatiest and most nuanced role as the real architect of Fassbender's downfall but the script doesn't give her the material to explore her character to the full. This is a flawed film, part thriller, part tragedy, part comedy and part shaggy-dog story. I will watch it again.

Vanilla Sky (2001)

Glossy but emotionally subpar remake

[6/10 · 4 February 2015]

I revisited Vanilla Sky recently. I wondered if my early impressions of the film might be ripe for revision. In one way they were. I came away from my second viewing with a clearer idea of the film's strengths and weaknesses. Vanilla Sky begins with a disadvantage. It's an almost frame by frame remake of the hugely successful and widely admired Spanish film Abre Los Ojos and so actively invites comparison. That's been done and I can't add anything meaningful to the debate. But since Vanilla Sky was made, there has been a rash of similarly themed movies, books and (in Britain at least) radio plays. Judged by these standards, the movie fares quite well. It's beautifully made. Everything and everyone looks wonderful. The girls in particular are perfectly cast and bring serious emotional power to their scenes. If you don't think Cameron Diaz can act, take a look at her scene with Cruise in the car. It'll send shivers up and down your spine. But that emotional punch is ultimately what the film lacks. It's the missing ingredient and the fault lies with Cruise. As the rich and impossibly charming playboy inheritee of his daddy's publishing empire, he's note perfect. Of course. Tom Cruise has made a career out of knowing his strengths and is rightly the most commercially successful actor of the last few decades. There's no denying his commitment to his craft and what serious actor could resist the lure of Charles Laughton's crown as the king of prosthetic pathos but it's the undoing of this film. All the training, all the practice, all the sheer willpower in the world cannot prepare you for a role like this. And that's the point. The role is pivotal and Cruise is not the actor to invest it with a full emotional life. Frankly, it's hard to think who would have been a better choice. Without Cruise, the film might never have been made and anyway, he's not the movie's only problem. Kurt Russel's responsible for some cringeworthy mugging, better suited to a bad daytime soap. Would I rather the film hadn't been made? No, it brought the story to a wider audience and has its own strengths. I doubt that it will be remade any time soon but if it were, I wonder what Tom Hardy would make of that central role.